Poppygate
By: Matt | November 4th, 2008For all SPL matches on the weekend of November 8 and 9, all players will be wearing poppies to “promote Scottish Poppy Appeal” and the group poppyscot. I’ll let Hearts player Micheal Stewart explain what poppyscot is and what the poppy means, “For a lot of Scots, footballers are their heroes but for me the real heroes are those who risk their lives in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. Many servicemen and women come home with physical and mental scars and Poppyscotland helps them readjust to civilian life.” So, lets look at the ingredients here, the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars? Check. Soldiers of her majesty’s army? Check. Dr. John Reid? Check. Sounds like we have all the ingredients necessary for a good old fashioned controversy cake for Celtic fans to digest on in the Tim-ernet. Apparently many Celtic fans have a problem with things that are British, including British Soldiers. Who knew, right? I am not going to comment on the poppy issue and whether Celtic players, coaches, staff, etc should wear them. Instead I will touch on another subject, somewhat related.
I do not think you will find many people who will argue the fact that the current Celtic board and chairman are looking to distance themselves from certain aspects of the club and it’s history, most of which come from the island of Ireland. Whether you agree with this move or not, I would think you would at least agree it is occurring. Often the cry from the board and those in support of this is, “There is no room for politics in football!” Fine, you are entitled to your opinion, but it would certainly seem that this whole poppy business is related to politics. Why are some politics allowed but other more touchy areas not? Why is it that when Boys of the Old Brigade gets belted out this past weekend the fishwraps call “Sectarianism” (where they mention religion in that song, I am not sure), yet the SPL demands, and certain Celtic board members follow right a long, that Celtic and their fans honor soldiers that do not have such a great record when it comes to dealing with the homeland of many Celtic fans.
Now if you’ll excuse me and my rantings, I’m off to starting viewing 24 hour election coverage. ‘Mon the Obama! No matter who you vote for, make sure you inform yourself and go vote.
Category: Celtic
Subscribe
|
Print
|
Share
      |
Comments
-
Obama is a West Ham fan, so jeers to him. And no, I am not a republican.
Unfortunately, football has historically been an outlet for political activism, of many varieties. I deplore the use of sectarian or political chanting in any sport. I disagree, however, with the measures proposed by the Bhoys at Keep the Faith or the ETims. Passing legislation banning “speech” sets a bad precedent. It empowers politicians to punish the people for speech crimes. And who determines what is and what is not acceptable? It’s a scary proposition, and I think Celtic supporters should steer clear of seeking a government solution to the problem.
Posted from
United States
-
I’m impressed by Obama even knowing who West Ham are. If I were to vote via sports teams, my allegiance to my Cleveland Indians would have prevented me for voting for a White Sox fan, luckily I am not such an idiot.
I am neither condoning or condemning banning speech, sectarian or political speech, etc. I am bringing up the double standard that the SPL and Celtic Board are presenting. Why is political messages about the troops in Afghanistan/Iraq allowed when supporters of a United Ireland are shunned when they sing their songs?
Posted from
United States -
I agree Matt, this poppy business is nothing short of a double standard. Now, I can understand wearing the poppy to commemorate the tragic and immense loss of life suffered in the First World War. However, such a divisive action as this will only stoke the flames.
Think of it as being akin to Sarah Palin dropping the puck at center ice for the Flyers and Blues, except this is worse.
Posted from
United States -
It definitely could have been presented better. If it were presented more as a way to honor Scottish soldiers who were serving, rather than British, or like Chris said, just to commemorate more general loss of life in wartime, that makes more sense than making a Scottish-British argument out of it. The argument could have been avoided.
Posted from
United States
Comments are closed
Home 
